Both cheated on their wife, one was forced to resign the other was given a free pass. The only difference I see is one paid and one got if for free.
I was under the impression that lying, when making an official legal statement , was illegal, it seems that does not apply to politicians.
ash
Favorite Answer
Spitzer was threatened with impeachment and resigned. Clinton was threatened with impeachment and stuck it out and was acquitted in the trial.
Return of Bite My Shiny Metal...
Monica was a run of the mill ugly groupie. There was no money exchange involved. The governor of New York broke some serious laws. There is a huge difference between the two events.
Lincoel
A better comparison would be Senator David Vitter (R-LA). Last year he was caught using prostitutes. He stood up before the cameras, admitted that he had used prostitutes after running on a "family values" platform. He refused to resign. So, he's still serving in the Senate.
Anonymous
The dear gov paid for the lady of the evening. Prostitution often has ties to drugs & the underworld, so Spitzer was a prime candidate for blackmail. That and some liked Bill...no one liked Elliot.
Der Mann
First of all, I am no Clinton supporter. But what Clinton did was a consensual encounter (a legal one). What the Gov. of NY did was participate in prostitution and a slue of other legal violations involving money and the moving of the female across state lines for prostitution.